1968
DOI: 10.1103/physrev.171.958
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Calculation of the Formation Energy of a Schottky Defect in Germanium

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1971
1971
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, calculations with Table 2 Calculated formation (E F ) and migration (E M ) energies in eV of the uncharged intrinsic point defects in germanium [20] Band theory in one electron approximation 2.21 [21] Atomic orbital method 2.63 0.4 3.52(H) 0.09(H) [22,23] Perturbation theory of covalent crystals 3. 6 2.5(T) [24] Non-orthogonal tight-Binding method 1.93 2.3(D) [25][26][27][28] DFT with LDA approximation 3.55(D) [29] DFT with LDA approximation 2.6 0.4 [30] DFT with LDA approximation 2. the parameters proposed by Yu et al [14] and Nordlund et al [13] most probably yield underestimated values for the formation energy owing to large changes in the parameters e and s. Yu et al [14], in their parameters sets marked as B and S indeed reduced the energy scale parameter e by 10-14%, while Nordlund et al [13] reduced this parameter by 20%.…”
Section: The Formation and Migration Energy Of The Vacancymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…On the other hand, calculations with Table 2 Calculated formation (E F ) and migration (E M ) energies in eV of the uncharged intrinsic point defects in germanium [20] Band theory in one electron approximation 2.21 [21] Atomic orbital method 2.63 0.4 3.52(H) 0.09(H) [22,23] Perturbation theory of covalent crystals 3. 6 2.5(T) [24] Non-orthogonal tight-Binding method 1.93 2.3(D) [25][26][27][28] DFT with LDA approximation 3.55(D) [29] DFT with LDA approximation 2.6 0.4 [30] DFT with LDA approximation 2. the parameters proposed by Yu et al [14] and Nordlund et al [13] most probably yield underestimated values for the formation energy owing to large changes in the parameters e and s. Yu et al [14], in their parameters sets marked as B and S indeed reduced the energy scale parameter e by 10-14%, while Nordlund et al [13] reduced this parameter by 20%.…”
Section: The Formation and Migration Energy Of The Vacancymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For that reason his results cannot be considered to be conclusive. Hwang and Watt [21] calculated the formation energy of the vacancy in Ge from first principles using the atomic orbital method. A fitting procedure was used in their calculations to reproduce the observed cohesive energy at the correlated lattice constant.…”
Section: Previous Calculationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The second term in E, can be calculated directly in the defect molecule approach (Larkins 1969) and is also given in table 4. Analogous calculations have been made for the vacancy in germanium by Hwang and Watt (1968). Third.…”
Section: Formation Energy Of the Single Vacancy (I) Molecular Orbitalmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The entropy terms include both the configurational and the vibrational entropies. The energy of formation is determined by the atomic bonding at the defect site and the energy of migration is determined by the energy of the saddle point configuration 20 3.27 21 3.53 22 Ge 2.3 23 2.29 24 0.7 25 0.5 26 1.7-2.0 27 2.3-4.1 28 0.36-0.7 29 2.4 25 3.55 30 2.6 29 3.50 31 2.56 31 along the minimum energy transition path between stable atomic configurations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%